Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Dupps Co. v. Lindley
Citations: 62 Ohio St. 2d 305; 405 N.E.2d 716; 16 Ohio Op. 3d 354; 1980 Ohio LEXIS 745Docket: No. 79-1223
Court: Ohio Supreme Court; June 11, 1980; Ohio; State Supreme Court
The central issue pertains to the interpretation of R.C. 5733.05(B)(2)(c), specifically regarding the definition of when tangible personal property is considered "received in this state by the purchaser." The statute states that for sales of tangible personal property, delivery is determined by where the property is ultimately received after transportation, and that direct delivery in Ohio to a purchaser constitutes receipt in the state, while delivery outside Ohio does not. The appellant contended that equipment picked up at a Germantown factory should be classified as Ohio sales, a view supported by the Board of Tax Appeals. However, the Court of Appeals argued that the Board improperly isolated part I of the statute without considering it in the context of the entire statute. Citing precedent, the court emphasized that statutes should be read as a whole and that all parts must be considered. Upon analysis, part II of the statute specifies that the location of receipt is determined after all transportation is completed, implying that customer pick-ups are included under "other transportation." The court rejected the notion that the General Assembly intended to exclude instances where the purchaser provided their own transportation or to differentiate based on the identity of the shipper. Consequently, the court concluded that since the equipment was ultimately received outside Ohio, these sales should not count as business done in the state. The judgment of the Court of Appeals was affirmed, with a dissenting opinion noted.